By Colbert I. King
Saturday, July 1, 2006
On this holiday weekend, let's take a trip.
First a visit to La-La Land, otherwise known as the press briefing room, where D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams has been known to take wing into flights of fancy when expounding upon the virtues of the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services.
His imagination was in full flower last week when, in a statement to the media, he stoutly defended Fire Chief Adrian Thompson and discussed the inspector general's report on the Fire and Emergency Medical Services response to -- as his news release quaintly put it -- a "January 2006 call." (Don't mention the dead guy's name.)
Said the mayor, in what may have been the most extravagantly fanciful statement of the week: "We've made changes to improve response time of transport units."
Now let's take leave of La-La Land and pay a call on the real world.
Four days after the mayor's hail to the chief and blown kisses to the FEMS, a tip came my way in the early hours of Tuesday morning about another emergency response, uh . . . situation.
Electing to avoid the usual bureaucratic runaround, I went straight to Chief Thompson after the doors opened on Tuesday morning concerning the tip that Ambulance 20, stationed at Engine 31 and staffed by two firefighters, had failed to respond to a call at 1:30 a.m. Sunday to 4201 Butterworth Pl. NW -- and that the crew was found asleep in Fort Reno Park. (The Associated Press, WUSA-TV and WJLA-TV reported the same news on Wednesday; The Post followed on Thursday.)
Thompson apparently was trying to get up to speed himself. His immediate response: "Looking into it now."
The tip was accurate.
Fire department sources confirm that the two firefighters assigned to Ambulance 20 did not respond to the dispatcher's call. Another unit was sent to Butterworth Place instead. Using the department's automatic vehicle locater, officials found Ambulance 20 in an alley near Fort Reno Park, with the two firefighters occupying front seats adjusted to a reclining position, sleeping like babies. They didn't even hear the door open.
As for 4201 Butterworth Pl.? That's the location of Friendship Terrace Retirement Community. The emergency call? A senior citizen was having trouble breathing. Six minutes went by before another ambulance was dispatched to take her to the hospital.
Improved response time of transport units? Have someone double-check those talking points, Mr. Mayor.
The two firefighters, according to an FEMS source, have been served with notices of proposed disciplinary action and are now on administrative leave until their cases are adjudicated by the fire department's trial board.
To La-La Land once again.
In the same statement, the mayor also declared: "We've made changes . . . .to improve quality of care with an enhanced training curriculum."
Back to the real world.
On March 31 Sgt. Theresa L. Shanklin, a paramedic instructor with Fire and Emergency Medical Services since 1987, sent Chief Thompson a memorandum that described a violation of training academy procedures. (Only initials will be used here.) She told Thompson that another instructor, Sgt. A., asked if she had dismissed the emergency medical technicians' class for the day, because lead instructor M. had given A. some information to be distributed to the class.
Shanklin wrote: "I looked at the papers Instructor [M.] gave to Sergeant [A.] and I was shocked. The documents that Instructor [M.] asked Sergeant [A.] to distribute were copies of question [sic] for the Department of Health Examination, scheduled for the next day."
Shanklin, who was honored as instructor of the year in 2003, 2004 and 2005, wrote: "This examination is very critical, it indicates whether a provider has the cognitive skills needed when faced with a life-threatening emergency in the field of operations." Shanklin said she informed M. of the violation of academy policies in the presence of academy training director W. and advised them that she had shredded the copies that were to be distributed to the EMT recertification class. Shanklin said W.'s failure to react with "alarm to this very serious charge" caused her to "wonder if this is a common practice for EMT recertification class." Shanklin asked Thompson for a full investigation and recommended that W. and M. be removed from the training academy.
Thompson was contacted June 20 for his response to Shanklin's charges and recommendation. Instead, Fire and Emergency Medical Services spokesman Alan Etter answered a series of queries in Thompson's behalf.
The following is a chronology of FEMS replies:
June 20, 3:43 p.m. : "This matter was brought to our attention at the end of March, and the investigation was completed by mid-May. We took the allegations very seriously and found that they could not be substantiated. The examination is administered by the D.C. Dept. of Health and no FEMS employees have copies of the test questions or any material used in its composition . . . sample questions and answers were developed based on experiences with prior tests . . . the instructor planned to distribute them to the class . . . this type of coaching is not permitted . . . The instructor was told not to distribute the material and the material was not distributed."
4:26 p.m. : "The instructor didn't even generate this document -- someone gave it to her -- and she thought it would be a good instruction tool -- so she planned to distribute it to students -- but that never happened."
The department was advised that A. had substantiated Shanklin's account in a meeting with me. I asked if the sample questions and answers had been compared with the actual tests handed out the next day. I also requested a copy of the investigative report and asked about the instructor's status.
4:37 p.m. : "The instructor was removed from the training academy. I have not seen the answers and did not compare them -- but the investigation did."
Who gave the instructor the sample questions?
5:09 p.m. : "It was a list of questions compiled from what was on past tests. I'm told the questions came from one of the students in the class."
Who?
June 21, 11:10 a.m. : "There was a student identified as being the originator of the document, but we can not identify him or her for the press because that person never faced disciplinary action . . . the student prepared the document based on his or her previous experience with the test."
Asked June 20 if the sample questions had been compared with the actual test questions, Etter said he did not do it, but "the investigation did." A day later, however, Fire and Emergency Medical Services -- through Etter -- reversed itself.
June 21, 11:10 a.m. : "Because Ms. Shanklin shredded the document, we have to rely on what the instructors said regarding its contents. It is unfortunate that Ms. Shanklin chose to shred the document."
So it's all her fault.
At one point during the exchanges, I asked Etter, who is a respected communications professional, "Please don't take this the wrong way, but do you still believe what you are being told?"
Wrote Etter: "Well -- you ask me questions -- I ask them -- they tell me -- and I tell you. It's a process."
It's also called the D.C. Boogie.
Not so at the D.C. Health Department, where I turned for answers this week.
Health Department officials reported:
? That the test administered to the EMT recertification class March 31 has been used "multiple times" since January 2003. That same test was administered this year on Feb. 3, Feb. 17, March 10 and March 31.
? That instructor M. took the same test in 2004.
? That "sample" questions based on previous tests, as explained by the FEMS, could have been the actual test questions; hence there is concern that the test may have been compromised.
? The FEMS never notified the Health Department about Shanklin's complaint.
Yesterday Beverly Pritchett, the recently hired senior deputy director of the department's Emergency Health and Medical Services Administration, issued the following statement:
"As corrective action, the [D.C. Health Department] has directed that new exams will be produced for each exam day. . . . Since no one can retest on the same day, we will continue to use that same test all day. This will allow for comparison between the different training sites for problem areas in instruction and pass rates.
"In addition, all EMT Training, Testing and Certification policies will be reviewed, updated and published not later than July 30th. Following that, all paramedic training, testing and certification policies will undergo the same review, update and publishing procedures."
Spread the word, Chief.
I would have sought comment from the mayor, but he was in London yesterday, and in Ankara, Turkey, today and tomorrow, and goodness knows where after that.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.